Looking back over the analysis of this book, we see that salient features of our practice of legal argument, both positive and negative directives, are generated by commitment to realize liberal legality. The same commitment is the root of the characteristic projects and assumptions of our law. Characteristic projects are particular ways of arguing legally. Three positive projects are persistent undertakings of liberal legal argument. First, formal argument makes use of rules as grounds of judgment. Second, ideal argument invokes practical moral aims as legal grounds. The third project is coherence. Coherence-seeking controls formalized law and idealized law alike. Characteristic assumptions are cautionary guidelines about what can go wrong. Two premises of disorder tell what legal argument must steer clear of, lest law fail to sustain legality. In short, law's general commitment gives rise to the undertakings and aversions of law. They are the varied fruit of a singular allegiance. The basic projects and assumptions define the distinctive pattern of pursuit of our law. Thus, starting with foundational commitment to realize liberal legality, we arrive at a unified understanding of our way of doing law.